Contact:Rodney GarrardTel. +41 31 631 54 39 rodney.garrard@cde.unibe.chwww.cde.unibe.ch

Fig. 2: Taboche peak (6,367m), and its neighbour Jobo Lapstan (6,440m) preside over the lower SNPBZ valleys as seen by E. Schneider 1950s & same photo-point in 2012, archives of A. Byers: and R. Garrard 2012.

Fig 1: Case study area & UNESCO World Heritage Site. The landscape of SNPBZ has been shaped by centuries of natural pro-cesses and human use since the ancestors of the Sherpa people entered the valley of Khumbu around ca 400 years ago.

Mountain ecosystems provide many ES (e.g. Koerner & Oshawa 20051):• protection from natural hazards• water provision and regulation•foodandfiberproduction• scenic beauty for tourism

Environmental services in moun-tain ecosystems are highly sen-sitive to climatic and land-use changes.

Box 1. Environmental services

Many efforts have been made to provide a scientific basis for using environmental services (ES) (Box 1) as a conceptual tool to improve conservation and livelihoods in mountain protected areas (MtPAs). Little attention has been paid to locals‘ concerns, especially in the Himalayas.This study uses a novel application of repeat photography to exami-ne local perceptions of ES change in Sagarmatha (Mt. Everest) Natio-nal Park (Fig. 1). We argue that our methodology could complement biophysical ecosystem assessments in MtPAs (Box 2).

Box 2. MethodoloyWe used a case study approach (DE VAUS 20013) and qualitative interviews, as these focus on concepts relevant to research participants.In each interview, we presented topo-graphical maps and a diachronic pho-to-diary, which helped researchers and participantselucidatedifficultconcepts.

We discussed perceptions of changes over time, then changes in selected ES. Interviewees ranked the degree of change on a 7-point Likert scale from -3 (negative change) to +3 (positive change) for each ES. Interviews were subjected to qualitative content analy-sis (HAY 20004).

Fig. 5: Namche Bazar as seen by F. Müller in 1956, and in 2011. The village is the HQ for SNPBZ authorities, today a bustling tourist centre ~1300-400 residents in 2011. (Archives of A. Byers: and R. Garrard 2011).

Fig. 4: Repeat photography as a diachronic photo-diary as the entry point to understand factors by which locals assess changes to specific ES (R. Garrard 2010).

3.5

2.5

1.5

0.5

-0.5

-1.5

-2.5

-3.5foodcrops

fodder e-wood

build-ing

non-timber

waterquantity

water quality

land-slide

land-scape

cultural

provisioning services regulating services cultural services

nega

tive

chan

ge

posi

tive

chan

ge

0

Fig. 3: Perceptions of change in relation to selected ES in SNPBZ; the Likert assessment mean, 75% quartile, and ranges are shown. (N=46); change reference period 1950-2011.

Part of Results

Food crops and fodder

53% of partici-pants say main-taining traditional land-use strate-gies is getting harder.

67% blame de-mographic and economic factors (e.g., increased tourist demand, reduction of Sher-pa workforce).

21% blame inten-sificationofpro-duction factors (e.g., chemical fertilisers, irrigati-on, greenhouses).

Landslides and floods

75% are worried about changes to regulating services (e.g., protection from natural hazards): riverflooding,landslides and erosion due to land-use change.

With predictions of more inten-se rain (IPCC 20072), and more building in high-risk zones, landslides and floodsarelikelyto accelerate.

Firewood and timberNational Parks conservation policies are seen as failing to balance local well-being, conservation and development:

.....we used to manage the collection of firewood within the community through our shinngi nawa [timber use tradition]... Now we are only allowed to collect two times a year [for] 10 days and we feel that next year it will be five days and then no access at all....

ThameKhunde

Phorche

Khumjung

Pangboche

Namche

Lukla

GokyoLobuche

Phakding

Dingboche

Gorak ShepLhotse

Everest

Ama Dablam

KhumjungNamche

Chaurikharka

460000

460000

480000

480000

500000

500000

3060

000

3060

000

3080

000

3080

000

3100

000

3100

000

ImprintAuthors: Elias Hodel, Rodney Garrard

Centre for Development and EnvironmentUniversity of Berne, 2013

Bhote K

osi

Dudh K

osi

Imja Khola

680

Population 1978

Population 2001

Population 2011

!Photo points 2010/11

!Ground Control Points

!.Settlements

#0Summits

National Park 1148 km²

Bu�er Zone 275 km²

Village Development Committee

Major Land Use/Cover ClassesNeedleleaved Forest

Mixed Multilayer Forest

Broafleaved Forest

Shrubland

Grazing Land

Bare Rocks / Bare Soil

Agriculture

Lakes / Reservoirs

Glacier / Snow

Settlement

± Projection: UTM 37N

0 5 102.5km

1:300'000Scale:

SourcesHillshade: SRTM v4.0, 2006Land use: DNPWC. Kathmandu, 2011

1350

environmental management 21

Local perspectives of environmental service change in Sagarmatha National Park, Nepal

References1 KÖRNER, C. & M. OHSAWA (Coordinating Lead Authors) 2005. Mountain systems. Chapter 24 In R. Hassan et al. (eds.)

Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Current State and Trends, Volume 1, Island Press, Washington DC: pp 681-7162 IPCC 2007. Climate change 2007: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Working group ll Contribution to the Intergovern-

mental Panel on Climate Change Forth Assessment report. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press3 DE VAUS, D. 2001. Research Design in Social Research. Sage Publications, London.4 HAY, L. 2000. Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography, Oxford University Press.